"What an intriguing myth to still be perpetuated so many years after the fact" I thought. Surely by now it had all been resolved, case closed, everything fully explained and accounted for....and Down the Rabbit Hole I fell.
I was curious about this odd bit of "urban legend". Alas, I knew nearly nothing about the Beatles. As a child I was raised strictly religious and was once made to read a book, "Pop Music and Morality" as punishment for listening to Jesus Jones. This book, ironically, was where I first learned about the back-masking in Beatles albums...but I didn't believe it. I didn't really care for much of what I'd heard of Beatles' music, anyways- much of it was creepy and strange, such as I Am The Walrus and Come Together...it didn't make any sense, I couldn't relate to it. I did vaguely think they had a strange obsession with Paul because of the weird line I thought went, "Nobody was really sure if he was from the house of Paul" and they seemed to always be pointing at him.
I did grow up in the MTV age, though, and was vaguely familiar with Paul McCartney from the video, "Say, Say, Say" with Michael Jackson and such. I remembered seeing a picture of Paul performing Hey Jude and, when cataloging my childishly observant mind, I reflected on the fact that Paul was strange- he never seemed to look the same! The only other time I recall ever paying any mind to the Beatles or Paul was a dream I had within a couple of days of hearing him be interviewed on the radio briefly before they played Biker Like an Icon. In the dream I was in a hot-air balloon flying over a picturesque farm with a red barn, a stage to the side, and a band playing on it for a small gathering. My balloon swooped in close to the guitar player and I saw up close Paul's detailed face and I remember thinking, "Paul McCartney looks nothing like himself!
My curious, intuitive, childhood observations were aware that something was amiss with the Beatles; and now the rabbit had appeared before me. I thought the best way to decide what was going on with this story was to first look into it directly: What was the evidence supporting this idea? Has there been a credible refutation, like a DNA test? Dentist Testimony, anything other than the basic, "Pshaw, no, of course not"; which left something to be desired all of the sudden. I knew that, like young Alice's intuition, curiosity and acute observational skill which led her through the tricky world of chaos and rationality to the truth, my childhood mind and intuition knew that something was going on that was not true.
The first place to begin was to learn everything I could about the Beatles, their history (before during and after), their music, the art around them, the history and culture of that time period and place. One of the first things I discovered was that there are as many versions of any given Beatle truth as there are versions of Strawberry Fields Forever. We'll discuss this further when we look at "Shoes". One can never be too sure that any specific fact is true, and all facts need to be investigated for consistency. That being said, I have journeyed far in the past 2 years of my investigation. I think the internet has changed everything, and that there is enough substantial evidence that, at the very least, SOMETHING is amiss! What it is, ah, that's where we fall down the Rabbit holes; but, whatever it is:
I'd love to thank whatever force injected the "Paul is Dead" myth into my life, because through it I came to know the Beatles, and their individual lives and music (I am aghast at having lived life without George Harrison's music!), at the opportunity to explore such an amazing story, that even as it officially stands is so amazing and complexly divine in it's eloquence in a literary sense- so mind-blowing bizarre and beautiful....and horrifying if you fall down certain holes. Beware and keep your shields raised and your energy cleansed...something wicked, weird or absurd or divine this way comes! Ha ha!!
Same as for me. I didn't like him from a childhood age. Whether that was intuition, or what it was, he was my least favourite Beatle right virtually from day one.
ReplyDeleteYes, Intuition isn't necessarily the product of some "magical-thinking/mind-reading", but generally more often the product of unconscious observations. Children are the best observers- that's how their brains develop and how they learn- through observation and an unconscious calculation of frequency and pattern recognition. Some games frequently played with children are, "One of these things is not like the other" and "Which one fits which hole". Children are especially good at games like this, because the development of neural connections in memory and thinking pathways requires them to be able to detect when something is always the same (building a strong neural pathway), and when something has irregularities (creating a "side-note" neural pathway). As we get older, our frontal lobe/ logic centers begin gearing up and begin "rationalizing", or telling stories to our own mind in order to make sense of things that are irregular. But, children develop emotional responses to things that defy their pattern and frequency thresholds- often with fear, a sense of discomfort or dislike. This is the security aspect of mental development (adults get much better at this, telling themselves it's all right and normal...nothing to see here!).
DeleteI think a child's observational skills are supremely capable of identifying those things which adults look past. In fact, whenever I go mushroom hunting, I find it best to take a child along; not only are they short and close to the ground, plus have better eyes then I do, but they can pick out the minute details of a Chantrelle poking out of the dirt where I see only maple leaves.
Children also aren't so afraid of being wrong or socially incorrect. They are the ones you will see in church pointing out how weird it is that God gives Samson a jawbone to slay the Philistines, then turns around and says to love everyone. Adults never point this out in church, but children, they notice the pattern irregularities, and in their innocence are just trying to develop strong connectivity maps.
That's why I think my childhood experiences are so important as to be my first post. We can say all we want to about Paul's weird face changes that we examine with microscopes and digital face-matching technology...but children, they just notice the patterns aren't right, and with that is a bit of purity that comes unbiased by preferences for the truth.